Reviewing HB 24 on Lab Grown Meat
By Karen Schumacher
Idaho HB 24 would have “established labeling requirements for alternative animal protein products sold in Idaho, such as lab-grown meat and insect-based proteins.” Rep. Scott presented it to the House Agricultural Affairs Committee on January 16, 2025, and Rep. Garner made a motion to introduce it.
On February 4, 2025 HB 24 was again discussed in the Committee, page 2. This time, Elizabeth Criner, Food Northwest, JR Simplot Company; Douglas Jones, Growers for Biotechnology; Melinda Merrill, NW Grocery; and Pam Eaton, Idaho Retailers Association all opposed the bill. The basis for this opposition was that “national labeling standards already ensure consistency for consumers,” and if passed, “organizations may be required to use two different labels—one for Idaho and another for other states.” Rep. David Cannon made a motion to hold HB 24 in Committee.
RS 32147 was then introduced by Rep. Scott, which intended to establish labeling requirements for alternative animal proteins, and outline regulatory oversight that would include penalties for non-compliance. Rep. Cannon motioned to introduce RS 32147. A substitute motion to return it to the sponsor was made by Rep. Shirts and was carried. Thus ended the attempt at labeling lab grown meats.
From the biographies, none of those in opposition appear to hold any type of science degree, and it is highly doubtful any of them conducted any extensive research into the processes that create lab grown meat.
In 2023, the federal government declared lab grown meat, also called cell cultivated meat, is safe to consume, and approved its sale in the U.S.. Good Meat and Upside Foods were given the green light to move forward with producing and selling cell cultivated chicken, but only to select restaurants. Bill Gates, an investor in Upside, and the World Economic Forum were probably thrilled with this announcement. After all, “Cell-based meat has been named one of the World Economic Forum’s “Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 2018” and has been lauded as a viable solution to animal-production challenges.” Hooray, billions of people not even born yet will be saved from starvation!
The Government’s Role in the Rise of Lab-Grown Meat | WIRED
Rejoice! Pesky cows will be saved from slaughter with reduced numbers, it is a climate change solution, deforestation from grazing will decrease so the forests will be saved and more carbon can be captured with land not used for grazing, lives will be healthier, and there will be less food borne illness! It is a win-win-win for all!
Then why are Americans so skeptical? FL, AL, and MS banned lab grown meat with TN and SD unable to pass legislation, while NE, MT, and WY are working on legislation to do the same. Even though the issue of labeling falls under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Federal Drug Administration (FDA), IA, TX, NC, SD, IN, OK, SC, AR. KS, MI, KY, and TN either have or are working on legislation with labeling requirements while AZ and ID bills failed. Surprisingly, this opposition has ruffled some feathers in the meat industry. Heck, if Italy can ban lab grown meat why can’t the United States?
Why the uproar and concern since the government proclaims these products are safe? Healthy distrust.
As it turns out, lab grown may not be good for the environment, or health after all. But beyond that, what effect does consuming it have on humans?
The process to create lab grown or cell cultivated meat is pretty straightforward and simple. Stem cells are taken from an animal’s muscle tissue and placed in a medium of nutrients and growth factors where cells can multiply. Once multiplied, cells are placed in a bioreactor around scaffolding so they will grow, then harvested when a muscle has formed. Sounds pretty harmless.
But for all the accolades about safety, there are concerning processes buried deep in the research. An attempt will be made here to explain just one critical, albeit dangerous, step in that process at the cellular level in simple terms but the studies are linked for those who want a deeper explanation. Bottom line, genetic engineering at the cellular level creates cells that are very concerning for human health.
Under Mechanism of Production in this 2022 study, it states the method of production involves “a combination of tissue and food engineering” and that “induced pluripotent stem cells” are “possible sources of stem cells.” In other words, these are genome reprogrammed cells, genetically altered. Under the Health Safety section, referring to culture mediums, it states, “researchers are unaware of whether these compounds have any short-term or long-term harmful effects on human health.”
It is important to understand p53. This is the gene in cells that suppress the formation of tumors through various mechanisms. When the p53 fails, mutates, or is damaged, there is no longer any tumor suppressor protection at the cellular level, and “is the most frequently mutated gene in human cancer.”
As noted, pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) are used for cell proliferation, meaning the cells can multiply rapidly. In this 2017 study, it was noted that p53 “mutations we observed are dominant negative and are the mutations most commonly seen in human cancers.” In other words, genetically altered hPSCs can result in damage to p53 similar to what is found in human cancer. Damaged or mutated p53 genes in cells can no longer suppress tumors.
In this 2021 study, under Conclusions, it states, “There are still several unanswered questions about how to establish immortalized cell lines suitable for human consumption as cultured meat…”. Primary cell lines die over time and “requires that donor herds of animals be kept to provide biopsies” so immortalized cells are preferred. “Immortalized cells have altered tumour suppressor genes so the cell can divide indefinitely” and are desired in the cultivated meat process because it speeds up the creation of cells. By creating immortalized cells, the p53 gene is turned off so the cell will proliferate, or multiply more rapidly.
The study goes on to say, “In addition, to the loss of function that a mutation in TP53 may cause, many p53 mutants are able to actively promote tumor development by several other means.” So, tumor suppressing p53 is inactivated to create an immortal cell line, thus disrupting the ability to suppress cancer cells, but in turn may promote tumor development.
This author made some bold, but accurate, claims, “One of the biggest concerns with lab-grown meat is the manipulation of DNA. To make the cells grow continuously, scientists alter the DNA…”. “Lab-grown cells are genetically engineered to keep proliferating, much like cancer cells.” That is a good, easy to understand summary of the studies.
Under 3.7 Genetic Modification, this author states, “concerns remain regarding genomic stability and potential tumorigenicity (cancer causing) after genetic modification”, a legitimate concern. Genetic modification isn’t the only concern, other concerns about lab grown meat are also discussed in the article.
A 2024 review of cell expansion in cultivated meat reiterates the ongoing concern and the need for addressing the issues further.
This article addressed the issue of genetic engineering in lab meat, how those processes are not being disclosed, and other concerns. It is easy to read and exposes the dangers of cultivated meat along with the deceit behind it. Studies validate information in the article. The World Economic Forum also promotes this deceit by leaving the truth out. Shocker.
Having been repeatedly advised to “follow the science,, study details are documented here to validate that science is being followed. No disinformation here folks.
No studies on the effect these products have in human health could be found. Declaring these products as safe and approving them without knowing the effect on human health is irresponsible, negligent, and immoral.
The lab meat industry is ramping up with a revised narrative to entice President Trump and HHS Secretary RFK Jr. to advance their product, however, it is unknown what stance the administration will take. Propaganda studies and other information will likely continue.
More than any other time before, it is confounding what the federal government is doing. What happened that caused our government to become so weaponized against the people that it is supposed to represent, and protect.
Similar to the Covid-19 gene therapy, uh “vaccinations”, a product for human use was unveiled, even mandated in some cases, causing tremendous harm to Americans. Now this with food. Federal employees condoning these technologies either have to be exceedingly stupid, or a plan to harm Americans actually exists. As more approvals for these threatening technologies and products are granted, one can only surmise that there is deliberate and intentional harm towards Americans. No other explanation seems plausible.
As of yet, lab grown meat cannot be purchased at the grocery store, leaving valuable time for Idaho legislators to put the much needed protections in place, at least mandating a label to warn and protect Idahoans. For further awareness, companies producing lab grown meat can be found here.
Idaho legislators should be educated on this issue and Rep. Scott should reintroduce this legislation again next session. Perhaps it would be even better if Idaho followed suit of other states and completely banned lab grown meat. Remind legislators that the science is being followed.